Posts Tagged ‘First Amendment’

After spending close to half an hour on hold I was finally able to speak to an NRA rep. at NRA / ILA. I received the usual lip service, and was told that my comments would be passed on…What follows is the limp wristed defense of their actions that landed in my email inbox this morning. This is just another example of the NRA selling out, again…

Statement From The National Rifle
Association On H.R. 5175, The Disclose Act

The National Rifle Association believes that any restrictions on the political speech of Americans are unconstitutional.

In the past, through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has opposed any effort to restrict the rights of its four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide.

The NRA’s opposition to restrictions on political speech includes its May 26, 2010 letter to Members of Congress expressing strong concerns about H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act. As it stood at the time of that letter, the measure would have undermined or obliterated virtually all of the NRA’s right to free political speech and, therefore, jeopardized the Second Amendment rights of every law-abiding American.

The most potent defense of the Second Amendment requires the most adamant exercise of the First Amendment. The NRA stands absolutely obligated to its members to ensure maximum access to the First Amendment, in order to protect and preserve the freedom of the Second Amendment.

The NRA must preserve its ability to speak. It cannot risk a strategy that would deny its rights, for the Second Amendment cannot be defended without them.

Thus, the NRA’s first obligation must be to its members and to its most ardent defense of firearms freedom for America’s lawful gun owners.

On June 14, 2010, Democratic leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives pledged that H.R. 5175 would be amended to exempt groups like the NRA, that meet certain criteria, from its onerous restrictions on political speech. As a result, and as long as that remains the case, the NRA will not be involved in final consideration of the House bill.

The NRA cannot defend the Second Amendment from the attacks we face in the local, state, federal, international and judicial arenas without the ability to speak. We will not allow ourselves to be silenced while the national news media, politicians and others are allowed to attack us freely.

The NRA will continue to fight for its right to speak out in defense of the Second Amendment. Any efforts to silence the political speech of NRA members will, as has been the case in the past, be met with strong opposition.

And this is what GOA has to say about this issue;

House Democrats Close to Reinstituting Penalties for Criticizing Congress
— Help GOA get other pro-gun groups on board in this fight

We alerted you last week to the very dangerous DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175), where liberal House Democrats are trying to gag their political opponents.

Well, there have been some late-breaking developments in the fight to kill this bill, but you’re not going to believe what’s happening. This is what Politico.com reported yesterday:

House Democrats have offered to exempt the National Rifle Association from a sweeping campaign-finance bill, removing a major obstacle in the push to roll back the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling.

The NRA had objected to some of the strict financial disclosure provisions that Democrats have proposed for corporations and politically active nonprofits and that had kept moderate, pro-gun Democrats from backing the legislation.

But if the NRA signs off on the deal, the bill could come to the House floor as early as this week. The NRA said it would not comment until specific legislative language is revealed.

An NRA official also noted that the group would not be supporting the bill but would not actively oppose it if the deal with the Democratic leadership holds up.

So if the NRA gets an exemption for itself, it will not oppose the anti-freedom DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175). This legislation is designed to overturn major parts of the recent Supreme Court decision which restored the ability of groups like GOA to freely criticize elected officials during a campaign.

But the NRA would no longer oppose the bill once they’ve won an exemption for themselves. As reported by Politico.com:

The legislation in question is designed to restore more campaign finance rules in the wake of last year’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, which removed prohibitions on corporations and unions running TV ads opposing or backing candidates in the run-up to an election.

Democratic leaders fear the Citizens United decision could open the floodgates for corporate money to flow into this year’s midterm elections, which they believe would favor Republican interests.

The legislation, offered by Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, would require special-interest groups to disclose their top donors if they choose to run TV ads or send out mass mailings in the final months of an election.

In addition to benefiting the NRA, this “exemption” amendment will benefit Blue Dog Democrats who will be given a green light to support the Obama-Pelosi backed bill:

Democrats are justifying the NRA exemption, saying the organization has a long history of being involved in the political process, and they say the real goal of the new campaign finance bill is to expose corporations and unions that create ambiguous front groups to run attack ads during campaigns. Unions would not be allowed to use the NRA exemption.

North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler, an NRA backer and conservative Democrat, proved to be pivotal to the NRA deal. Shuler was the first to offer an amendment to exempt the NRA and other nonprofits from the legislation, but that move drew objections from campaign watchdog groups.

“There were a number of concerns that the DISCLOSE Act could hinder or penalize the efforts of certain long-standing, member-driven organizations who have historically acted in good faith,” Shuler said, referring to the NRA. “Most of those concerns are addressed within the manager’s amendment.”

But here’s the rub, the special exemption amendment will ONLY benefit the NRA and no other groups whatsoever. It will leave all other groups who are currently in Obama’s crosshairs dangling in the wind:

The proposal would exempt organizations that have more than 1 million members, have been in existence for more than 10 years, have members in all 50 states and raise 15 percent or less of their funds from corporations. Democrats say the new language would apply to only the NRA, since no other organization would qualify under these specific provisions. The NRA, with 4 million members, will not actively oppose the DISCLOSE Act, according to Democratic sources.

The exemption for a huge group like the NRA is sure to outrage smaller special-interest groups [like Gun Owners of America].

We are in a political war, and our opponents are trying to change the rules of the game by gagging those groups that are their political enemies. Some might say that the requirement to disclose our membership is not a gag rule, but it most certainly is. Gun Owners of America will NOT do anything that would jeopardize the privacy of our members!

Gun owners know the dangers of being registered, as it has often proven to be the first step towards gun confiscation — which, by the way, is why it’s lamentable that the management of the NRA is selling out its members for the proverbial bowl of pottage. (Go to http://tinyurl.com/2uw9sm9 to see what a leading Capitol Hill blog has written about this sell-out.)

We’re positive that regular members of the NRA would never want this to happen — where all the other pro-gun organizations (like GOA) that are fighting to protect our rights would be gagged, while special favors are cut for one group in particular.

We stand shoulder to shoulder with NRA and all the other pro-gun groups when they are fighting to defend our Second Amendment freedoms. We all have to stick together if we are going to win these battles.

We’re not sure who is making the decisions over at the NRA headquarters… but this type of thing would have never happened in the past, and we’re positive that the NRA membership would not be happy with it. This cannot stand!

ACTION: Please do everything you can to kill this dangerous DISCLOSE Act legislation (HR 5175). Here’s what you can do:

2. Call the NRA-ILA at (800) 392-VOTE (8683) and urge them to oppose this legislation and to rate any congressman who votes in favor of HR 5175 as having cast an ANTI-GUN vote. Urge them not to sell out our constitutional freedoms just because they can get an exemption for themselves.

I stand with Gun Owners of America in opposing the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175).

There are reports that a deal may be cut to exempt one large organization from the terms of the DISCLOSE Act. This smacks of the money-for-votes fiasco which helped grease the skids for passage of ObamaCare and which has already lowered Congress’ reputation to unprecedented depths.

On the Senate side, Senator Mitch McConnell blasted this deal, which is aimed at carving out special exemptions for the NRA leadership in exchange for their promise to sit on their hands and not oppose the DISCLOSE Act. “If there is one thing Americans loathe about Washington, it’s the backroom dealing to win the vote of organizations with power and influence at the expense of everyone else,” McConnell said.

“Just as it wasn’t the Democrats’ money to offer in the health care debate, free speech isn’t theirs to ration out to those willing to play ball — it’s a right guaranteed by our First Amendment to all Americans.”

I agree wholeheartedly. Please do NOT vote in favor of this legislation, as it will have a chilling effect upon our free speech rights by forcing the organizations we associate with to disclose their membership lists.

How ironic that a Congress and President who treat transparency with contempt should now be trying to force legal organizations to disclose the names of their law-abiding members. The hypocrisy is blatant, to say the least.

The infamous campaign finance act that restricted you, me, and others from banding together to make our voices heard took a bit of a hit this past week. No doubt the anti liberty forces will come out railing against this. Perhaps a little cheese to go with the Whine? Read on…

A three-judge panel of the DC-based Second Circuit Court of Appeals struck down prohibitions on campaign spending by independent political groups, a move one observer warned “could lead to a more negative campaign season.” The rules, which were put into effect following the 2004 campaign, prohibited outside entities from the unfettered use of so-called “soft money” — money not used in direct advocacy for the election of a particular candidate or issue. These rules came in the wake of a huge wave of political spending by tax-exempt organizations recognized under IRS Code, Section 527, such as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and Club for Growth.

While some think that this ruling will largely benefit conservative groups given the recent overwhelming participation in the Tea Party movement, left-leaning groups also stand to prosper, as unions will once again be free to distribute their massive political war chest to a number of new and existing 527 groups such as Moveon.org. In fact, it was the pro-abortion group Emily’s List that filed the suit, claiming the rules restricted their First Amendment rights. We agree — on that point.

Another victory against current unconstitutional campaign-finance rules is pending in the Supreme Court, where the provision banning corporate purchases of political ads 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election is undergoing scrutiny through the case of “Hillary: The Movie.” We won’t comment on the merits of the film, but given the withering questioning from several justices, it’s possible that McCain-Feingold itself may be on the ropes.

Remember, you heard it here that the new FCC Comisar was, and is, a clear and present threat to the American way of life. Not only does he have a completely warped understanding of the First Amendment he is solidly in the left’s corner when it comes to racism. Only whites can be racist…At least that is what his ilk appear to believe.

Mark Lloyd is the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)’s Chief Diversity Officer, a.k.a. the Diversity Czar. And he has in a recently discovered bit of archive audio goodness detailed his rather disturbing perspective on race, power and the American system.

“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.

“[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance.”

And Lloyd’s rather disturbing perspective on Venezuelan Communist dictator Hugo Chavez’s “incredible…democratic revolution.” To go with Lloyd’s bizarre admiration for the thuggishly fascistic manner in which “Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country.”

We have said repeatedly that Lloyd is a man myopically focused on race. What is revealed here is more than just that. Listening to excerpts of his offerings at a May 2005 Conference on Media Reform: Racial Justice reveals a man that finds great fault with our nation’s power structure – as he defines and sees it. And in his racially-warped, finite pie worldview, too many white people sit alone in the too few spots atop the heap. They’re “good white people,” mind you, but …

There are many ways to undermine Liberty. Make gun control into a “health” issue is one. More on that at a later date… Then, as if that isn’t outrageous enough. The anti liberty and freedom crowd are making traditional human things into First Amendment arguments. That’s right, hunting and fishing are on the table for the Black Crow Cowards. As a First Amendment issue no less...

The first salvo against the right to free expression was recently firedin Oklahoma of all places. Although this worked out it never should have happened in the first place.

The police officers who stopped Oklahoma City motorist Chip Harrison and confiscated a sign from his car told him he has a right to his beliefs, but the Secret Service “could construe this as a threat against President Obama,” according to the incident report released this morning.

As a staunch supporter of the Constitution, which expressly states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…,” I am embarrassed by many of my countrymen who are bending over backwards to accommodate radical Muslims by installing religious ritualistic devices in public places.As a Muslim, I am embarrassed, as well, by many of my co-religionists who attempt to impose their radical religious agenda on American society by installing the same ritualistic devices in these same public places.

As an American Muslim, I am personally offended when I read about footbaths on public property, i.e., municipal airports, state colleges, etc. I think that the best way to combat these blatant Constitutional violations is by turning the aforementioned footbaths into urinals.

Our government seems to have neither brains nor balls to combat the advance of stealth Gihad, but I believe that American people are smart enough and courageous enough to handle the threat of Sharia.

I am asking every American patriot to place this (see image) or similar note above every footbath located on public property, then take a picture and email it to us at INFO at REFORMISLAM.ORG.

For some strange reason I never thought John McCain was never out of trouble with conservatives. Lets run down a list of the reasons whybeginning with his ratings on gun control from GOA since 2000 he has never garnered better than a C-and more recently F- has been the case. The list against McCain is long so I will post links to those things that are the most important to me.

Campaign and DNC Launch Assault On First Amendment!

Earlier this week, NRA-PVF released a series of radio and television spots to educate gun owners and sportsmen about Barack Obama’s longstanding anti-gun record. In response to the NRA-PVF ads, a clearly panicked Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are doing everything they can to hide Obama’s real record by mounting a coordinated assault on the First Amendment.

They have gone to desperate and outrageous lengths to try to silence your NRA by bullying media outlets with threats of lawsuits if they run NRA-PVF’s ads. They have sent intimidating cease and desist letters to cable operators and television stations, threatening their FCC licenses if they run the ads.

NRA stands behind the accuracy of these ads, and NRA attorneys have responded to the Obama campaign’s despicable and abusive attempt to trample on the First Amendment by sending a thorough rebuttal to station managers.This rebuttal clearly and conclusively refutes the Obama campaign’s fallacious claims that the ads are inaccurate.For more information, and to see the letter, please click here.

To learn the truth about Barack Obama’s anti-gun record, please visit www.GunBanObama.com.This website is loaded with features and information that you, as a gun owner, need to know.This is a must-see website that you will want to pass along to anyone you know who loves freedom and supports the Second Amendment.While you’re there, don’t forget to take the “OMatch,” compatibility quiz to see if you and Barack are a match.